Bill To Hasten Apartheid's End Certain To Have Boomerang Effect

WASHINGTON — Within the next few days the House will take up the Anti-Apartheid Act of 1985. Rarely have such very good intentions been embodied in such very bad law.

The bill was introduced in March by Democratic Rep. William Gray of Pennsylvania. Last month it flew out of the Foreign Affairs Committee on the wings of a 26 to 8 vote. To oppose the bill is politically difficult; a vote against the measure would be widely if mistakenly construed as a vote in favor of South Africa's pervasive system of racial discrimination.

These are the principal features of the bill: It would bar all loans by U.S. banks or other institutions directly to the government of South Africa. With certain exceptions, the bill would prohibit ''any United States person from making any investment in South Africa.'' It would forbid the importation of any Krugerrand or other gold coin minted in South Africa. It would forbid the export of any ''computers, computer software or goods or technologies intended to service computers.'' Any individual convicted of violating the law could be fined not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.

These draconian provisions could be waived for periods of 12 months if the president determined (and the Congress approved his determination) that South Africa had taken steps to eliminate ''all policies'' having to do with the system of apartheid.

If there were convincing reasons to believe that Gray's bill would accomplish good things in South Africa, perhaps a case could be made for these sanctions, but the proposition that Congress can forbid American citizens to make investments is a proposition that deserves more thought than it has received so far. Let me put that point aside.

Would these sanctions cause unbearable economic damage? Not at all. If the history of sanctions teaches anything, it teaches that in today's global economy, sanctions simply do not work. The United Nations imposed sanctions on the sale of arms to South Africa; these prohibitions had not the slightest discernible effect. The United Nations imposed sanctions upon Rhodesia, and Rhodesia flourished.

South Africa may be suffering a severe recession, but its basic economy is strong. In times past U.S. banks have lent roughly $4.5 billion to the government of South Africa, but in recent years such loans have almost dried up. Large corporate investments

in South African plants also have diminished as a consequence of anti- apartheid protests. The effect of Gray's bill would be minimal.

To forbid new investments in South Africa is to invite the withdrawal of old investments. Here we are talking of total disinvestment. And to what good end? Almost 300 U.S. companies do business in South Africa. They employ an estimated 120,000 blacks, 70 percent of whom are covered by what are known as the Sullivan Principles. These principles oblige management to maintain a desegregated work force and to provide incentives and opportunities for blacks to advance toward managerial positions.

What on earth would be gained by pressuring these companies to sell out? A better case can be made in favor of expanded U.S. investment, for such operations as those of General Motors and Ford become models of resistance to apartheid. The path toward increased participation of blacks in national affairs will be smoothed by economic growth. It makes no sense to put obstacles in the way.

A further objection to the bill is that it defies human nature. Political leaders share a common resentment of being pushed around by outside forces. If this misguided measure should be enacted, the most probable result will be to get the Afrikaners' backs up. They are a proud and stubborn people. Over the past 12 months the South African government has taken significant steps toward relieving the most offensive aspects of apartheid. The system is slowly crumbling.

Members of the House might want to remember how long it took for apartheid to crumble in the United States. We started in 1787 with a Constitution that permitted human slavery. As recently as 1954, 17 states still maintained racially separate schools.

Crumbling takes time. The pending bill won't speed that process in South Africa; it will serve only to slow it.